So we into our second week of this discussion, and so far there's been lots of good discussion. Much of it seems to be coming from people already immersed in the topic. I'm wondering if there are others for whom this is very new and who may have questions on things that get passed over pretty quickly.
Are you new to OER? What was your first thoughts when you saw the seminar description? Is this what you were expecting? Has this discussion been useful to you? Are there questions you have that you are not seeing addressed?
Please ask away!
Scott Leslie
Posts made by Scott Leslie
While the following is related more to "open access" publishing (a subset of the 'open' movement but arguably not the same as OER) I think it still really important - http://jisc.ac.uk/news/stories/2009/01/houghton.aspx is reporting that a study in the UK finds that in addition to the benefits to the public of having open access to knowledge,
Now those are the kinds of numbers to get people's attention. So while the playing field is slightly different, I'd warrant the effect would be similar with OERs.
"When considering costs per journal article, Houghton et al. believe that the UK higher education sector could have saved around £80 million a year by shifting from toll access to open access publishing. They also claim that £115 million could be saved by moving from toll access to open access self-archiving."
Sylvia, these are really good, thanks. Some more stuff from OCW/MIT along the lines of the value proposition of OER - this presentation lists the following as potential benefits:
Am really enjoying this thread. I will try, when time permits, to go through and see if I can't pull out (and myabe put in the wiki) all the different "why's" of sharing OERs that we've managed to come up with so far. Do people have others, especially ones that could be directed to the individual faculty member? I like the idea someone suggested of 'examples' and 'success stories' as I think these can work - people have other ones they can share, either their own or ones they've heard?
- fulfilling your insitutional mission
- institutional reputation
- faculty reputation
- recruitment
- retention
- advising
- evaluating for tenure
- service learning
- international engagement (expanding connections and reach)
- create a lifelong connection with students
- improvements in teaching materials and transparency of teaching methods
Am really enjoying this thread. I will try, when time permits, to go through and see if I can't pull out (and myabe put in the wiki) all the different "why's" of sharing OERs that we've managed to come up with so far. Do people have others, especially ones that could be directed to the individual faculty member? I like the idea someone suggested of 'examples' and 'success stories' as I think these can work - people have other ones they can share, either their own or ones they've heard?
Bronwyn, I know I would LOVE to hear more about how CC-Attribution became the default license for the entire institution. Is this something you (or Leigh? He's at Otago too, no?) has written up already on the web?
As you clearly indicate, such a move is only a small part of the process, but what a small part! That is one success story I would love to hear more about.
As you clearly indicate, such a move is only a small part of the process, but what a small part! That is one success story I would love to hear more about.
I'll jump in here too and suggest that if we approach the issues of how we create and deliver our online courses, how we then share our online courses, and how we then sustain our sharing efforts as separate issues, then I think we are doomed from the start. In my mind, this is, for better or worse, the situation the field as a whole largely finds itself in now, but over the past 3 or 4 years people have been thinking this through and coming up with some interesting alternatives.
If instead we broaden our frame as educators (especially those educating in publicly funded systems) and start to identify benefits of openness and sharing not as subsidiary acts, but as a core part of both the teaching and learning process, then I believe what will emerge are sustainable solutions that do not need to go looking for the next grant or start the next big insitutional project to help sharing to occur.
So, just for instance, if we start to identify the benefits back to the educator, the learners and the institution of having learning materials under constant public scrutiny, open to improvements by many (the 'all bugs are shallow with enough eyeballs' phenomenon of open source); if we start to identify the benefits to learners, the institution and instructors of learning taking place out in the open so that serendipitous interactions with real world experts can occur; if we (insert your arguments here)...then not only will our own students and faculty benefit, but our efforts at openness will by default become sustainable.
I will take up this strand of how to create educational content in more sustainably ways in another thread, as I believe it is a full topic on its own. But I'll just leave off here saying that what the last 6 years of wrestling with the OER issue has taught me is that the what, how and why of OER are intimately connected. Far from being an insurmountable, unsustainable challenge, OERs have the potential to help us re-invent our educational practices and our institutions in ways that will not just benefit everyone involved, but will ultimately become understood as the transformations our institutions needed to adapt to the 21st Century's demands. Heady claims, I know, but they really do seem a part of a bigger picture to me.
If instead we broaden our frame as educators (especially those educating in publicly funded systems) and start to identify benefits of openness and sharing not as subsidiary acts, but as a core part of both the teaching and learning process, then I believe what will emerge are sustainable solutions that do not need to go looking for the next grant or start the next big insitutional project to help sharing to occur.
So, just for instance, if we start to identify the benefits back to the educator, the learners and the institution of having learning materials under constant public scrutiny, open to improvements by many (the 'all bugs are shallow with enough eyeballs' phenomenon of open source); if we start to identify the benefits to learners, the institution and instructors of learning taking place out in the open so that serendipitous interactions with real world experts can occur; if we (insert your arguments here)...then not only will our own students and faculty benefit, but our efforts at openness will by default become sustainable.
I will take up this strand of how to create educational content in more sustainably ways in another thread, as I believe it is a full topic on its own. But I'll just leave off here saying that what the last 6 years of wrestling with the OER issue has taught me is that the what, how and why of OER are intimately connected. Far from being an insurmountable, unsustainable challenge, OERs have the potential to help us re-invent our educational practices and our institutions in ways that will not just benefit everyone involved, but will ultimately become understood as the transformations our institutions needed to adapt to the 21st Century's demands. Heady claims, I know, but they really do seem a part of a bigger picture to me.